I guess that depends upon your definition of "the best" or "strongest". If you're randomly placed against weak teams, and not peer-to-peer, and win the tournament, does that really make you the best or strongest? (Isn't that more like a scene you might see in some Will Ferrell movie - where he'd only play basketball against little kids?)

For a while, the tournament formats included "peer-to-peer level of gaming". As the tournament progressed, the best still ended up winning, but they did it playing against comparable teams. That's what's missing. That's what I was asking about.

We've modified format where was peer-to-peer seeding in this off-season, because there were much teams which didn't come to the battles in previous off-season, moreover a part of the groups didn't have battles at all, because they were receiving technical loose/win. That's why we decided to add one more stage with "strongest - weakest" seeding, we don't want that players come to tournament and have no battles.